Question Description
In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice In his historic address to the Parliament of the World's Religions in Chicago in 1893, Swami Vivekananda declared, "I am proud to belong to a nation which has sheltered the persecuted and the refugees of all religions and all nations of the earth." It is ironical that a political party which conspicuously proclaims its allegiance to Swami Vivekananda has restricted by law, about 127 years later, citizenship to people on the grounds of both religion and nation.Looking back, it is pertinent to ask why Jawaharlal Nehru, an international statesperson and a leading moral voice in the community of nations, refused to sign the 1951 Refugee Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.Scholars suggest that whereas he was committed to the principles enshrined in the Convention, he was unwilling to legally bind the country to its obligations.The Convention first defines refugees as persons fleeing persecution on grounds of race, religion, nationality, social group or political opinion. Refugees get legal rights, most important of which are "non-refoulement", which prevents states from sending back refugees to persecution in their home countries. They also get secondary rights, such as to education, work and property.India needs to bring in a refugee law which conforms to international conventions. This would, first, recognise eligible undocumented immigrants as refugees, based on evidence determined by due process of their persecution in their home countries. This would also assure them a set of binding rights. The most important of these is the guarantee that they would not be forced to return to the conditions of persecution, threatening their lives and liberty, which they escaped. The second is that they would be assured lives of dignity within India, with education, health care and livelihoods. Only then would India become the country which Swami Vivekananda was so proud of: a haven to the persecuted of the world, untainted by discrimination based on religion or nation.Q. India has long argued that even without signing the Convention, in practice it is one of the leading refugee receiving countries. Refugees include Sri Lankan Tamils, Tibetans from China, Chin minorities from Burma/Myanmar, and Hindus from Bangladesh and Pakistan. Based on the essence of the passage, will the author welcome the stand of India in not signing the Convention?a)Author would welcome the stand of India since not signing the Convention will help in eliminating the infiltrators and termites from the soil of India.b)Author would welcome the stand of India since signing or not signing of the convention is in the discretion of India. International pressure cannot force any country to become a signatory to any convention.c)Author would oppose the stand of India since it runs counter to the interests of refugees, their life, liberty and their deportation will expose them to persecution.d)Author would oppose the stand of India since it violates the requirement of principle of International law and charter of UN which provides that no State can interfere in the internal matters of other States.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.